Well Dan doesn't know how to make balls using CTE, so does that make us even?So... nothing Scientific at all. Not surprising as Mr. Shuffett said that he was NOT going to go into the supposed why.
As I think Dan White said you seem to not know how SCIENCE works.
Same = Same
Different = Different
For CTE to be what it is said to be, then those basic truths must be broken.
Dan White said he made Mohrt's Shot about 12 times in a row without looking at the OB after getting the shot line.Well Dan doesn't know how to make balls using CTE, so does that make us even?
How can you expect what does not exist to be diagramed or explained on paper like in a book?
You are just as guilty as any other and by your suggestion here's the first post that started the downward spiral.I think you paint with too wide of a brush. Go back & see when it first started going bad.
I even highlighted it for you....You seem to be well grounded in reality & with some understanding of simple rational, logical, cognitive, reason & general science & common sense.
I am sure that you realize that Mr. Shuffett's CTE can not be & is not what it is said to be... & that a few proponents posting here are in denial of that reality.
Doing the same thing does not = something different... not even when doing the same thing is a visual procedure.
So... why are you engaged in the endeavor that you seem to have taken on?
I complimented you & gave you a piece of truthful information regarding your endeavor & then asked why were you endeavoring what you were.You are just as guilty as any other and by your suggestion here's the first post that started the downward spiral.
I even highlighted it for you....
Save your breath for the mindless bickering, I'm moving on
How do you know Dan shot the shot and what the results were?With all due respect, when false statements are made, why IYO should those false statements not be countered with the truth?
Dan White DID shoot Mr. Ohrt's shots & his results were exactly what should be expected per science.
Someone is basically calling Dan White a liar. There is no basis for that. He has been hit with ad hominem attack after ad hominem attack.
It is not generally known if I or others have also shot those shots. Yet it has been said the no one has.
False statements should not be made & should not be tolerated as such is a form of encouragement.
In all of the time that Hal Houle's CTE & Stan Shuffett's CTE has been out with the affirmation that SS's CTE is an Objective System that "objectively dictates" to the shooter the center pocket shot line has any evidence or proof of any kind of scientific nature been offered to indicate that it is. Yet, those claims/assertions have constantly been made or suggested or implied.
Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the sciences knows that those asserted claims simply can not be true. Ask anyone with a rudimentary understanding off science. Ask Dr. Dave. Ask Bob Jewett. Ask other members with scientific backgrounds.
The thing is that it should not matter... but it does... to Stan Shuffett & to the proponents. because otherwise CTE is in the subjective realm just like ALL other methods. CTE is different, but being different does not = an objective system.
Again, with all due respect.
Because I stated so in my video. Again, I hit balls with mohrt's instructions on multiple occasions and on the day I made the video I spent about an hour with it. My results, as I said in the video, were a bit scattered but the average of my attempts (while not looking at the ob last) were represented in the two shots in the video. The center table shots went in or near the pocket while the downtable shots went long.How do you know Dan shot the shot and what the results were?